best review book for psych subject test

[mommy2three]

hey all,
i am planning on taking the psych subject test in november (yes i am also applying to med school but have been interested in psychology for some time and consider this a viable alternative for me personally with the career i would like to have).
anyway, i took the practice test on the gre website yesterday and i scored a 550 which corresponds to the 43rd percentile 😱 okay not too bad considering it has been two years since i have had any psych courses and much more than that since i have taken my intro course.
so i need to review for the test....i have looked on amazon but the review books have gotten mixed reviews on whether or not they help. so i thought i would come here and see if you all could help me wade through the inromation out there and discern a good review book(s) to prep for the test (keeping in mind that i will only have about 2 months to study for the exam)

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[irish80122]

If you have some time to study, I would go for the Kaplan book. It was the most in-depth (or at least it seemed like it to me) and I think you will do the best if you really know that. However, if you are cramming like I unfortunately was, Princeton Review tries to get it down to what you will need to know. They will miss things, of course, and you won't do as well as you could with the Kaplan, but I just think it is a better book if you are short on time and are just trying to get some extra points. I hope that helps.

 

[psycguy85]

I think the Princeton Review's book is a good one because it hits all the major areas on the test. Another good way to prepare is to skim an introductory psyc textbook. Obviously, you don't have time to read the entire book, but scanning for bold terms and big names will certainly help you out. Using both an intro book and a review book like Princeton Review or Kaplan will ensure that you cover a vast amount of material. But remember, you aren't expected to know everything! Best of luck!

 

[irish80122]

I think the Princeton Review's book is a good one because it hits all the major areas on the test. Another good way to prepare is to skim an introductory psyc textbook. Obviously, you don't have time to read the entire book, but scanning for bold terms and big names will certainly help you out. Using both an intro book and a review book like Princeton Review or Kaplan will ensure that you cover a vast amount of material. But remember, you aren't expected to know everything! Best of luck!

lol, are you sure about that? It sure felt like that sometimes with taking the test. No, you don't have to get all of the answers, and you won't, but they are picky and pretty much anything is fair game.

 

[JockNerd]

I liked the Princeton Review. I saw my friend's Kaplan and, though I only saw the Kaplan book briefly, I thought the PR looked like it was better organized. But, I ended up using flash cards made from the Princeton book more than the book itself in the last few weeks of studying.

I'd strongly suggest that whatever you do, don't just try to read methodically through the study guide or a text. Study a bit, take a practice test, then go back and code the questions for what subject area they covered. Ignore anything you have down pat and focus on the areas you're weak in. The bother of coding those questions will pay off in vastly increased studying efficiency.

There's NO WAY to get everything right! I had a few questions that literally asked for the specific result of a specific study that might have been mentioned briefly in a textbook for an elective course.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Oh yeah....START EARLY!!

Most people under-estimate the amount of time they would need/want to study. I often hear, "I wish I studied more...." and RARELY, "Wow...I was over-prepared, and probably didn't need to review as much as I did." Of course, our members here seem to have their thinking caps on (based on scores I've heard)....so I'm not sure where they would fall on that scale.

-t

 

[JockNerd]

Most people under-estimate the amount of time they would need/want to study. I often hear, "I wish I studied more...." and RARELY, "Wow...I was over-prepared, and probably need to review as much as I did." Of course, our members here seem to have their thinking caps on (based on scores I've heard)....so I'm not sure where they would fall on that scale.

My study plan:
6 months before Psych and General GREs (wrote both within two weeks of each other): Began prep work, reviewed entirety of both study books for general overview and test structure. 1/2 hour per day for each test

5-4 months before GREs: Began studying with practice tests every two weeks to identify weak areas. 1 hour per day for each test.

4-1 Month before GREs: 1 hour a day for each test. Focused on identified problem areas on the tests (e.g. Memory and researcher names for Psych GREs, paragraph Qs and stupid fraction questions for general). Used vocab flashcards & contextual vocab building.

1 month - test day: Focused on material that is was primarily memorization (e.g. researcher names in fields I was unfamiliar with). 1/2 hour to 1 hr each day for each test.


I scored well. I STILL felt like I could have done more.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

The irony about the Psych GRE.....I think 85% of it you won't really use once you get into clinical work. Much of it contributes to your knowledge base, but it isn't stuff you'll use on a daily basis.

-t

 

[clearcolor]

I don't know how much your psych GRE score is really that important. I know some prof only cared about my regular GRE, and having a higher score helped me there. Regular GRE scores helped applicants get fellowships at some schools I applied, but I don't think the psych GRE was the same. I imagine it was used more as a cut off, although I wonder if some schools even looked at it. I was at a national AABT conference eating lunch alone and listened as a prof was telling his colleage that his school should stop requiring the psych GRE cause they aren't considered at all in accepting students. Wish I could tell you the school!

But to answer your question, I used only the PR book and would occasionally google terms that I didn't understand well. I studied one month before the exam (was still in undergrad). I think I got around the 85th percentile.

 

[JockNerd]

I don't know how much your psych GRE score is really that important. I know some prof only cared about my regular GRE, and having a higher score helped me there. Regular GRE scores helped applicants get fellowships at some schools I applied, but I don't think the psych GRE was the same. I imagine it was used more as a cut off, although I wonder if some schools even looked at it. I was at a national AABT conference eating lunch alone and listened as a prof was telling his colleage that his school should stop requiring the psych GRE cause they aren't considered at all in accepting students. Wish I could tell you the school!

My experience has been different. The school I'm going to used my psych GRE marks as well as my general GRE marks when they put me in for my fellowship. The amount of time I spent studying for both tests proved to be well worth it.

I know a lot of people hate the GREs. 😱 I'm going to have to take the probably-unpopular position and say I like them and definitely see their use. I do think they should be MUCH cheaper (on the order of about half the price). GRE registration and sending tests comprised a pretty significant portion of the money I spent on applications.

 

[atis]

I nth the Kaplan book. I felt like it really helped me prepare. But definitely get a more in depth intro review book if you can (I hear the SparksNotes one is pretty good). All I did was memorize the kaplan book (I spent 5 days studying because I didn't realize that the test was only offered 3 times a year) and ended up doing pretty well (at least I think).

But go more in depth if you have the time...for example the April test had TONS of developmental on it. I never took a developmental class and it wasn't really covered in the kaplan book, so i thought i was screwed. Turns out i wasn't but it would have saved me 6 weeks of slight anxiety had I felt better prepared.

If you've got the time, start memorizing names, large concepts, and key theories, and you'll be fine.
Good luck to you!

 

[GiantSteps]

I used books by Kaplan, Arco, Barons and read through some general Psychology text books. I Also looked at some old class notes. They were all worthless for the GRE Psychology test until I took the real ETS-GRE Psych. practice test. After looking at the questions I missed and the questions I did not answer, I realized three things:

1. I had to get down the pacing. If you want to do well, you really need to get through the whole test and try to answer every questions on which you can at least make an educated guess (i.e. at least eliminate one or two choices).

2. I saw that there were certain areas I knew very well and others I did not. So I spent more time studying the areas on which I was having trouble rather than waste more time on areas I knew.

3. (This was the startling revelation). I realized that the GRE- Psychology test is not a test of the field of psychology. These are not the types of question any informed psychology professor or applied psychologist would stick on a psychology test. The test is clearly the product of a bunch of meatheads (probably Vegan meatheads - Hear that RayneeDeigh! - All roads lead to the Raynster!) who were just trying to compile a bunch of questions which fell into the correct percentiles ranges for which they were looking to make their statistics work out. These meatheads ask the same questions over and over again but in variations so they can not be accused of giving the same test over again. Therefore, one must only study for this specific test - its style. For example, you may get through the entire test whithout seeing a question on an important diagnosis which is actually used from DSM but you may be asked previously used names of certain current diagnoses. One thing in particular is that the test designers love hypotheticals (alright, this part I can the importance of - can one apply his or her knowledge) so if you are just memorizing all the stage names of Freud, Piaget, and Erickson so that you can spit them back out, you are wasting your time. If you think of a hypothetical person who has certain symptoms/ behavior and then think which stage this person might fit in you are doing something right.

One final note, everyone whom I have ever spoke to who took this test asked upon completion: "where did all that social psychology come from?"

 

[Ollie123]

I did minimal studying from the Kaplan book and bought a Psy101 textbook that I never got around to making use of and did pretty well (93rd percentile I believe). It really just feels like a slightly more in-depth Psy101 final exam. Its not like the general GREs where there will be lots of "right but not AS right" answer choices, there really aren't many (if any) tricks. Just boatloads of information to memorize. I firmly believe my undergrad education was horrible, and I obviously still did okay so I imagine other schools might prepare you even better.

Learn names, they like names. Learn the anatomy of the ear and eye for god knows what reason. I had about 10 questions on those and haven't looked at either since high school bio. I'd have probably done even better had I studied that.

JockNerd I wish I had your discipline, that's really admirable that you put that much effort and planning into the exam. My general GREs did not go very well and maybe if I had prepared like that I'd have done better...I winged my SATs and got a 1400 so figured if I put even a little effort into the general GREs I could do well.....nope! My math went okay but with my verbal score I'm surprised schools didn't ask me to take the TOEFL.

 

[KillerDiller]

I didn't sit down and skim any of the material in the practice books, but I did take practice test upon practice test from all of them. For whatever reason, that seems to be my study method for standardized tests--the general GREs the Psych GREs, the LSAT. I'm pretty cheap, so instead of buying any of the books, I took old copies out from the library and then went to Borders and sat in the cafe to look at the newer versions while taking notes on a pad of paper. Anyway, my view on the books is that the Barons practice tests were harder than the actual test while the questions in the Kaplan book were easier. I just say this to hopefully decrease your chances of either being freaked out by or underestimating the difficulty of the actual test.

My somewhat biased opinion of the Psych GRE is that although it is not the most relevant thing in the world, I'm still more willing to have schools use that as a benchmark than the general GRE, which seems like a particularly arbitrary way to judge applicants.

 

[clinicalpsych]

I actually found it helpful to use two books. (Kaplan & Princeton Review). I actually bought a third book which consisted of just tests. I found that the practice tests that the third book offered were very different from the kaplan and PR books and were actually similar to the questions on the test. ALso, each book offer different details and you NEVER know what they will ask!

 

[terrybug]

I used only the Kaplan book and found it to be a real let-down. It spent a huge amount of pages on schizophrenia which never once appeared on my test. And the book definitely never mentioned any of the I/O material that appeared on the test in abundance.